Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR) (Read 3788 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Hi, I'm thinking of switching to OPUS as it seems to be the lossy format of the future and I've been doing some testing, mainly for the purpose of archiving several albums with the best possible lossy quality (I only use FLAC for a few important audio files. I don't need bloat lossless for most of my collection). I'm an "MP3 VBR v0" user and I'd like to know if "OPUS VBR 256k" is VERY superior as everyone says. I've converted several albums (from lossless) with the above parameters and noticed that the final size is quite similar in both cases (opus a bit heavier in some cases).

I know that transparency is guaranteed in both cases, but, assuming the source is lossless: "MP3 VBR v0" kills more samples during conversion than "OPUS VBR 256"? Does the latter preserve much more information than "MP3 VBR v0"? Is "OPUS VBR 256" really worth it? Or maybe the difference between the two is insignificant and I should stick with MP3 v0? I've read that OPUS only has an advantage at low bitrates like 128 or lower, but at higher bitrates, there are practically no significant differences between OPUS, MP3, AAC, etc. (don't recommend AAC, I prefer non-proprietary formats).

I'm sticking with 256k because it seems like a higher bitrate doesn't really improve quality, it just increases the final size without any sense.

Another question (not very knowledgeable on the subject),, is that I've read that OPUS has the "disadvantage" (in some cases) of sampling everything at 48khz instead of 44.1khz by default. Why would this be a disadvantage?

Regards.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #1 –
Because Opus already transparent at 160 ~ 192kbps, Anything higher Is just overkill?.
Lossy QAAC at Q91 | Lossless FLAC(only archiving)

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #3 –
About Opus quality... technically is better than MP3 at high bitrates.
But... Opus will never encode nothing above 20KHz, even when sample rate is 48KHz. Maybe that could be a disadvantage.
Opus doesn't support anything above 48KHz, it will resample and encode all the information below >20KHz band.

So this is the thing: Lossless > (Musepack? :-X) > AAC ~256 > Opus 192-72 > (x)HE-AAC 64-48... (below this there isn't anything good)

Okay... from MP3, converting to Opus will not make an audible difference, at 256 (or some kbps below), and actually there shouldn't be an important loss of quality (being totally serious). But you will lose 20-22/24 KHz band... if it's even relevant, since MP3 almost errase this entire band, I guess that isn't a problem.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #5 –
based on several listening test opus preform quite well in 96-140kbps. Almost transparent in all kinds of audio. So I think it's not necessarily to use 256kbps. 192kbps should be more than enough.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #6 –
Quote from: Porcus on
Do you get Opus gapless by now, without a lot of hassle?

Lack of gapless playback by design has kept me away from Opus so far. Lately I've done some basic testing with earphones and couldn't hear any glitches. I am still reluctant regarding Opus however. Do you have examples of the hassle you are referring to?

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #7 –
Quote from: a.ok.in on
So this is the thing: Lossless > (Musepack? :-X) > AAC ~256 > Opus 192-72 > (x)HE-AAC 64-48... (below this there isn't anything good)
:D Correction, Opus is still somewhat better until ~45kbps, then I would prefer xHE-AAC (not exhale). Anyway at this point all codecs start to severely degrade audio quality. So, I wouldn't use anything below 64kbps.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #8 –
Quote from: Radagast on
Another question (not very knowledgeable on the subject),, is that I've read that OPUS has the "disadvantage" (in some cases) of sampling everything at 48khz instead of 44.1khz by default. Why would this be a disadvantage?
The disadvantage is that it can be confusing. If you're not familiar with how Opus works, you might be surprised when you see 48kHz in places where you'd normally see the original sample rate. Plus, Opus files keep track of the original sample rate, so you'll sometimes see that instead of 48kHz.

Quote from: Porcus on
Do you get Opus gapless by now, without a lot of hassle?
Not that I know of, but I'm happy to rework my half-baked libopusenc frontend if someone comes up with a good API for something like foobar2000 to encode multiple files in a single call to a command-line encoder.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #9 –
Quote from: btc on
A couple of tests:

AAC@192 kbps (comparable to Opus@192 kbps) has the same or superior quality than MP3 V0
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,121579.0.html

Opus vs MP3
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,117489.0.html
Excellent tests (although I don't know why they performed the second test in CBR instead of VBR.
Also, between both tests it could be intuited that, taking the quality of MP3 v0 as a "starting point", OPUS at 192k is "slightly superior" and going beyond that bitrate with OPUS is not worth it.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #10 –
256 is too much IMO.  Your not saving / hearing anything (over mp3) and risk compatibility .
A better option is vorbis -q6 ~ 192k or if going for opus ; 160k  nothing more than 192.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #11 –
> taking the quality of MP3 v0 as a "starting point", OPUS at 192k is "slightly superior" and going beyond that bitrate with OPUS is not worth it.

doesn't necessarily follow, LAME V0 has (rare) samples which some users can ABX.
plus they are in any case not really directly comparable.
a fan of AutoEq + Meier Crossfeed

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #12 –
Quote from: magicgoose on
doesn't necessarily follow, LAME V0 has (rare) samples which some users can ABX.
plus they are in any case not really directly comparable.
Mind to explain or backup your post?
Without proper explanation or example nobody will understand you.

More specifically, how two audio codecs are not comparable?  We're discussing  stereo MDCT-based audio codecs at high rates here.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #13 –
Here's a sample that magicgoose could ABX with Opus at 200: https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,96108.msg974516.html#msg974516

Back in 2012, it took freeformat-mp3 (that can go to 640) for user @softrunner to fail ABXing. CBR 320 was ABXable, but I don't see that anyone tried V0, which would spend 314.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #14 –
I reviewed that topic. 
  • it was one single sample. Statistically speaking it has very small value (and it's really kind way to tell it)  in comparison  with complete personal blind tests with multiple samples provided below
  • Those tests were isolated cases of ABX sessions, where different users tested just one encoder at a time (MP3 320k, Vorbis, Opus). What does it exactly tell us?
    Now let's compare it again with completed personal blind tests (down below) where MP3 have been directly compared to Opus or AAC in the same blind sessions called ABC/HR.

Now let's contrast it with these tests.

Quote from: btc on
A couple of tests:

AAC@192 kbps (comparable to Opus@192 kbps) has the same or superior quality than MP3 V0
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,121579.0.html

Opus vs MP3
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,117489.0.html
One more personal test here  https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,120007.0.html
Where all 4 encoders AAC/Opus/Musepack/Vorbis have received 4.90+ MOS scores.
And given results from previously cited test https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,121579.0.html, there is no doubt that all AAC/Opus/Musepack/Vorbis @ 192 kbps will be at least on part with LAME V0 (score 4.83)
Looking at distrubuiton of all these tests it's evident that MP3 has more difficult samples where its score goes down more frequently.

There are also couple of Kamedo2 MP3/AAC tests. I just couldn't found it.

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #15 –
it's not telling much for the "general case", yes, but it does suggest that pushing the quality settings further up might not necessarily be completely useless, depending on what you want to achieve
a fan of AutoEq + Meier Crossfeed

Re: OPUS 256k vs MP3 v0? (VBR)

Reply #16 –
Quote from: a.ok.in on
So this is the thing: Lossless > (Musepack? :-X) > AAC [...]
;D
How I stopped worrying and returned to loving lossy encoding again?
By listening to music, not the media it's on.

"União e reconstrução"